Michael O'Hanlon

Survival, the bi-monthly publication from The International Institute for Strategic Studies, is a leading forum for analysis and debate of international and strategic affairs. With a diverse range of authors, thoughtful reviews and review essays, Survival is scholarly in depth while vivid, well-written and policy-relevant in approach. Shaped by its editors to be both timely and forward-thinking, the publication encourages writers to challenge conventional wisdom and bring fresh, often controversial, perspectives to bear on the strategic issues of the moment.

The recent conclusion to the war in Afghanistan — America’s longest and one of its most frustrating — serves as a vivid reminder of the unpredictability and tragedy of war. In this timely book, esteemed military expert Michael O’Hanlon examines America’s major conflicts since the mid-1800s: the Civil War, the two World Wars, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan. Now updated with a new preface that addresses the Revolutionary War and brief observations on three other conflicts in U. S. History, O’Hanlon’s unique book — combining brevity and clarity with a broad conceptual approach —serves as an important treatment of America’s military history at the strategic and theater of operations levels. It should appeal to students of security studies and military history at universities and war colleges as well as generalists. He addresses profound questions. How successful has the United States been when it waged these wars? Were the wars avoidable? Did America’s leaders know what they were getting into when they committed to war? And what lessons does history offer for future leaders contemplating war?O’Hanlon looks for overarching trends and themes, along with the lessons for the military strategists and political leaders of today and tomorrow, including the observation that war is usually far more difficult than expected, and that its outcomes are rarely predictable.

The tragic conclusion to the war in Afghanistan — America’s longest and one of its most frustrating — serves as a reminder that the United States too often is at war, and sometimes fails to achieve its short-term or long-term aims.In this timely book, esteemed military expert Michael O’Hanlon examines America’s major conflicts since the mid-1800s: the Civil War, the two World Wars, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan. In this new, concise book, he addresses profound questions. How successful has the United States been when it waged these wars? Were the wars avoidable? Did America’s leaders know what they were getting into when they committed to war? And what lessons does history offer for future leaders contemplating war —including the prospects for avoiding war in the first place.The book does not tell stories at the ground level —the day-to-day tactics and human bravery and perseverance that since ancient times have made warfare so tragically fascinating. Instead, the book presents America’s major wars on a conceptual level, focusing on strategies, key decisions, innovative technologies and the dynamics that shaped their outcomes. O’Hanlon looks for overarching trends and themes, along with the lessons for the military strategists and political leaders of today and tomorrow.O’Hanlon’s unique book — combining brevity and clarity with a broad conceptual approach —is an important one for students of security studies at universities and war colleges as well as generalist policymakers.

An informed modern plan for post-2020 American foreign policy that avoids the opposing dangers of retrenchment and overextension“A masterful examination of past American grand strategy and foreign policies. A compelling, thoughtful, and thought-provoking proposal of a new grand strategy by one of America’s foremost writers and thinkers on U.S. defense, foreign policy, and geopolitics.” —General David Petraeus, U.S. Army (Ret.) Russia and China are both believed to have “grand strategies”—detailed sets of national security goals backed by means, and plans, to pursue them. In the United States, policymakers have tried to articulate similar concepts but have failed to reach a widespread consensus since the Cold War ended. While the United States has been the world’s prominent superpower for over a generation, much American thinking has oscillated between the extremes of isolationist agendas versus interventionist and overly assertive ones. Drawing on historical precedents and weighing issues such as Russia’s resurgence, China’s great rise, North Korea’s nuclear machinations, and Middle East turmoil, Michael O’Hanlon presents a well-researched, ethically sound, and politically viable vision for American national security policy. He also proposes complementing the Pentagon’s set of “4+1” pre-existing threats with a new “4+1”: biological, nuclear, digital, climatic, and internal dangers.

An informed modern plan for post-2020 American foreign policy that avoids the opposing dangers of retrenchment and overextension“A masterful examination of past American grand strategy and foreign policies. A compelling, thoughtful, and thought-provoking proposal of a new grand strategy by one of America’s foremost writers and thinkers on U.S. defense, foreign policy, and geopolitics.” —General David Petraeus, U.S. Army (Ret.) Russia and China are both believed to have “grand strategies”—detailed sets of national security goals backed by means, and plans, to pursue them. In the United States, policymakers have tried to articulate similar concepts but have failed to reach a widespread consensus since the Cold War ended. While the United States has been the world’s prominent superpower for over a generation, much American thinking has oscillated between the extremes of isolationist agendas versus interventionist and overly assertive ones. Drawing on historical precedents and weighing issues such as Russia’s resurgence, China’s great rise, North Korea’s nuclear machinations, and Middle East turmoil, Michael O’Hanlon presents a well-researched, ethically sound, and politically viable vision for American national security policy. He also proposes complementing the Pentagon’s set of “4+1” pre-existing threats with a new “4+1”: biological, nuclear, digital, climatic, and internal dangers.